Originally posted by Armagoden No one is "telling" anyone they must resign, its a question of respect and sportsmanship in my view. As a previous person said, " maybe you just can't accept the fact you lost so you want some revenge? I have no attitude, but you sure are displaying one! Your the type I dont want to play because when you lose your a sore loser, like Al Gore remember him?😏
Yes you are. This is an imperative sentence:
"Be a gentleman congratulate your opponent and gracefully resign."
You don't have an attitude? You made a thread telling people to resign when you feel like it!
I am not a sore loser, but I do get highly irritated by people telling me patronizingly to resign.
You should tell a player he has no hope on winning to resign if he hasn't, but for beginners it is better to finish the game because they can learn from their mistakes. This not my opinion I read it from a book but if they are intermediate players they should know better.
Originally posted by AThousandYoung Yes you are. This is an imperative sentence:
"Be a gentleman congratulate your opponent and gracefully resign."
You don't have an attitude? You made a thread telling people to resign when you feel like it!
I am not a sore loser, but I do get highly irritated by people telling me patronizingly to resign.
Well thats your view which is fine. My own is I am going to resign a lost position congratulate my opponent on a game well played and move on, because I enjoy playing chess. My point here is maybe some novices dont know they can gracefully resign and in chess we have a way out with honor and thats congratulating our opponent and resigning and maybe offering a rematch. Its ok to resign and ok not too, either case the winner still wins so you still lose, so why not move on? Be a gentleman give your opponent his reward for a game well played win, lose or draw. And by the way, I would never ask a person to resign, I should of made that clear, you apparently have misunderstood my view here. Again I would never ask or tell someone to resign, but if someone would ask me? I would look over the position and if I truely felt there maybe a possible chance I'd reply back a few more moves please and not go into some barbaric mind set. Ask the gods of Cassia, the lords of the game. Have fun.🙂
When I first learned chess people told me never to resign! You cant win if you resign! You cant draw if you resign!
For awhile I started listening to people with the opinion of the OP.
Not anymore. That view is rubbish imo today.
That being said there ARE some players at this site I will resign to. They are all very sound players throughout all aspects of the game. If I am facing a loss I won't prolong it because there is next to no chance they will blunder it away...
However, if they are rated lower than 1900 at this site, I will not resign.
They can do their part and checkmate me if they are able.
I will then message them and say Thanks for the game! GL in the rest of yours!
If they want to be pissy because they had to checkmate me (god forbid!), well, too damn bad.
When you know the game is lost and are reasonably sure your opponent knows how to win, resign the game! That said, some players may not be good enough to know they are lost so keep playing as is their right. I once watched a player who could not win with a K&R vs. K. Obviously it would be a major blunder to resign ANY game against him. Never, ever, ask an opponent to resign. I had a guy playing next to me one time ask his opponent, who had just dropped a N, “Would you like to resign now?” He was politely told, “No.” A few moves later the guy returned the favor with interest and dropped his Queen. His opponent leaned over and asked, “Would you like to resign now?” Everybody sitting near the game cracked up and the guy resigned in embarrassment and hustled out of the room.
If my opponent doesn't resign in a lost position, I decide to have fun with it. I'll promote as many pawns as I can (to minor pieces if it doesn't affect my chances of winning) I'll go around scooping up all their remaining pieces and do as much as I can to stall winning. Much more fun than getting upset about it. I've even had a few say, "Why don't you just checkmate me??!" To which I reply, "Do you need me to show you where the resign button is?"
Once you start playing 1450+ players, you'll find that hardly any of them will drag the game out when they know it is lost.
Originally posted by Lord Vader You should tell a player he has no hope on winning to resign if he hasn't,.. This not my opinion I read it from a book but if they are intermediate players they should know better.
I can't imagine what book might have suggested that it's in any way your place to tell your opponent when things are hopeless for them. If you did this in rated OTB play you should expect at least a stern warning from the TD.
The best way to keep from being frustrated by oponents who play on after you figure they should resign is to accept that it's their right to play to checkmate (as it is) and not worry about it. It isn't reasonable to expect that all your opponents will share your views on the matter, and holding strong oppinions can only hurt you. If their position is really so hopeless this shouldn't be a bother.
Originally posted by tmetzler If my opponent doesn't resign in a lost position, I decide to have fun with it. I'll promote as many pawns as I can (to minor pieces if it doesn't affect my chances of winning) I'll go around scooping up all their remaining pieces and do as much as I can to stall winning...
I'd suggest it would be in your best interest to try a different approach. Whatever small bit of fun you are having teaching them a little lesson will be undone a thousand times over that one time (and it will happen eventually) when the opponent you're toying with takes all that excess material and the fact that you're not playing rationally to work a stalemate you never saw coming.
Originally posted by Skorj I'd suggest it would be in your best interest to try a different approach. Whatever small bit of fun you are having teaching them a little lesson will be undone a thousand times over that one time (and it will happen eventually) when the opponent you're toying with takes all that excess material and the fact that you're not playing rationally to work a stalemate you never saw coming.
Exactly. One of my first internet games a couple years ago I had a mate in one & my opponent e-mailed me, “Now you can mate me next move or torture me with (another move).” Why would I want to torture the idiot? Just mate him & be done with it.
Funny thing...in correspondence chess and OTB, I've never had an opponent who kept playing on and on in a lost position. They always resign when it's time. Why does this only happen on internet chess?
Originally posted by tmetzler Once you start playing 1450+ players, you'll find that hardly any of them will drag the game out when they know it is lost.
That can sometimes be a bit of a problem, though. You can get a 1450+ rating here when you are still very much a beginner and haven't played many games. So there will be many simple endgames you have never played, but your opponents will usually resign because they think you know what you are doing. Of course you can read up on it instead, but it would probably be better for the learning process to play them out a few times.
Originally posted by Skorj I'd suggest it would be in your best interest to try a different approach. Whatever small bit of fun you are having teaching them a little lesson will be undone a thousand times over that one time (and it will happen eventually) when the opponent you're toying with takes all that excess material and the fact that you're not playing rationally to work a stalemate you never saw coming.
Oh, I don't do it to teach them a lesson. I do it just for fun. 🙂
If by some miracle they work out a stalemate because of my screw-up because I was toying with them, then kudos for them.
I have a game in which I am a rook, a bishop and six pawns up.
My opponent has a king and is restricted to just 4 squares of the board by my rook, which is protected.
Should my opponent continue to play this obviously lost game, should I checkmate him quickly or would I be cruel to toy with an opponent who obviously has so little regard for a player who got him into this situation in the first place.
Originally posted by Diet Coke I have a game in which I am a rook, a bishop and six pawns up.
My opponent has a king and is restricted to just 4 squares of the board by my rook, which is protected.
Should my opponent continue to play this obviously lost game, should I checkmate him quickly or would I be cruel to toy with an opponent who obviously has so little regard for a player who got him into this situation in the first place.
He obviously drag the game forever if he doesn't resign. (*) We don't like this kind of behaviour.
If you drag the game by slow down the game as much you can by unneccesarily promote pawns, move the king around and not winning the game as fast as possible - you do the same thing. No one likes that behaviour either.
(*) There might be reasons to drag a game. Like speculating in rating points, possibility for a stalemate or 3rd repetition draw, or something that neither you nor I can't imagine.
Just go and win the darn game, dont make it into a conflict neither can win.
Don't behave the way you don't want others to behave.
Originally posted by FabianFnas ...Don't behave the way you don't want others to behave.
Just to add to that thought let's also remember that, this being the internet and all, it's wise not to make too many assumptions about youre opponent or what motivates their actions. Refusal to resign or any other type of behaviour that seems unsophisticated or immature may in fact be due to the fact that you're playing a talented 10 year old. I'd be embarrassed to find out I was mirroring someone's childish behaviour only to find out they had an excuse for it that I didn't.
How to Resign with honor
10 Jan '07 11:451 edit
Back to Top